Allowed

Idbi Bank v. Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd. Through Irp Mr Sushil Kumar Singhal

DRT25 Aug 2026OA/169/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Debt Recovery Tribunal allowed an original application filed by IDBI Bank under Section 19 of the RDB Act, 1993, for recovery of dues from guarantors (respondents) despite the corporate debtor being under corporate insolvency resolution process and subject to a section 14 moratorium.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 8,19,64,250/- with 13% interest from date of filing; Recovery Certificate to be issued.

Idbi Bank versus Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2026)

¶1

Before SUSHIL KUMAR^{RASTOGI,Presiding Officer} Debts RecovelT Tribuna!-Il,^Delhi

¶2

o[lt69l2023

¶3

IDBI BANK VS M/S COROMANDEL^{AGRICO PvT LTD &} oRs

¶4

Reserued on =^3L.O7.2O26 Pronounced on : 25.08.2O26

¶5

IDBI BANK LTD

¶6

Applicant bank

¶7

Vs.

¶8

¶9

M/s Coromandel Agrico M^{Ltd (under CIRP)}

¶10

2 Mr. Anand PradeeP Kumar

¶11

3 M/s SIMBA Securities h/t^Ltd

¶12

4 M/s Mara Securities h/t^Ltd

¶13

5 State Bank of India

¶14

¶15

DBS Bank India Ltd

¶16

-^Defendants

¶17

Present:

¶18

Shri Sanyam Gupta,^{Counsel appearsfor} applicant bank.

¶19

Ms. Kusum Pandey,^{Counsel for defendant} nos.2 to 4. Shri Baljeet Singh,^{Counsel for defendant} no.5.

¶20

None for defendant^{nos.1 and 6'}

¶21

FINAL ORDER

¶22

This original application has^{been flled by the} applicant bank, on^{2L.02.2023through Shri Gurpreet} Singh Chawla,^DGM of^{the applicant under Section 19} of the RDB Act,^{1993 against the defendant nos.2 to 4} for recovery of a sum^{of Rs.8,19,64,250/-together with} cost, charges and^{pendentellite and future interest} @13.00o/o^{from date of filing of this-O'A.till the} realization in full.

¶23

9J.

¶24

oA NO/169/2023 2

¶25

The brief facts of the case are that at^the request of defendant no.2 as director of^defendant no.1, the applicant bank sanctioned a^{C-ashCreditLoan} Facility (Hypothecation) of Rs.8 Crores,^{vide sanction} letter dated 03.01.2012. The defendants^nos.1 &² executed all necessary loaning documents^on 30.01.2012 and 26.03.2012. The applicant^{bank and} other lender banks namely defendant^no.5and Corporation bank, formed a consoftium,^{led by} defendant no.5, to sanction credit^{facility to defendant} no.1 to meet its working capital requirement.^The above-mentioned loan facility^{was covered under the} consoftium agreement dated^{26.03.2012, therefore,} member of the consortium exchanged/issued^letter ceding^pari-passu charge whereby^{they cededpari-} passu charge in respect of financial assistance^granted by the member of the^{consortium.The defendant nos.2} to 4 executed deeds of^{guarantee as part consortium} documentation to secure the^{loan taken by defendant} no.1 in respect of the above said^{facilities. Again, at the} request of defendant nos.l & 2, the applicant^bank enhanced an aforesaid^{credit facilityfrom Rs.8 Crores} to Rs.13 Crores, vide sanction^{lefter dated 04.05.2013.} The defendants executed all^{necessaryloaning} documents on 04.05.2013. It^{is submitted that a new} consortium documentation dated^{18.08.2017was} undertaken incorporation^{the structural changes in the} consortium. The applicant bank^{along with defendant} nos.5 & 6 were^part of this new^{consoftium.The} defendant no.2 on behalf of defendant^{no.1 applied for} renewal of the aforesaid loan aforesaid^{loan facility} which was accordingly renewed^{by the applicant bank.} The cash credit limit was,reluced to^{Rs.6.94 Crores} €\

¶26

¶27

oA NO/169/2023

¶28

from Rs.9 Crores, vide sanction letter dated

¶29

19.10.2020. Again, at the request of defendants, the applicant bank sanctioned an Additional Capital^Term Loan Facility of Rs.1.39 Crore under Guarantee Emergency Credit Line Scheme^(also known as Covid Loan) which was^granted to them vide sanction letter dated 25.03.2021 and defendants executed all necessary loaning documents on 25.03.2021. It is submitted that in^pursuance to order datd L9.04.2022 passed by Hontle National Company Law Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Prayagraj, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process was initiated against defendant no.1 company and a moratorium was also imposed as per Section 14 of the IBC. The applicant bank has already Rled its claim before the IRP. In view of the moratorium imposed by Honble NCLT, Allahabad Bench, Prayagraj vide order dated 19.04.2022, under Section 14 of the Code, no relief is being claimed against the defendant no.l company in the^present O.A. The defendant nos.5 & 6 are^proforma defendants and are banks and financial institution carrying on the business of banking and flnancial in India. The applicant bank along with^profroma defendant nos.5 & 6 has^provided various loan and credit facilities to the defendant no.l from time to time.

¶30

It is further submitted that the defendants enjoyed and utilized the Loan facility, but failed to maintain the financial discipline and failed to repay the due amounts. The applicant requested the defendants to regularize the loan account by visits and letters, but there was no response from the defendants. Hence, the account was classified as NPA dated 30.12.2021. The

¶31

¶32

OANO/16912023 4

¶33

applicant bank served a recall notice dated 10.01.2022 and demand notice dated 24.02.2022 to the defendants but failed to recover the same Thus, the present O.A. is preferred by the applicant bank to recover its dues.

¶34

On notice by this Tribunal, the defendant^nos.2 to 5 put appearance through counsel. The defendant nos.2 to 4 failed to file written statement on time^and right to file written statement of defendant^nos.2 to⁴ was also closed vide order dated 13.11.2025.^The defendant no.5 has filed written statement^{but failed to} file evidence. The defendant no.6 failed to^put appearance.

¶35

In their written statement^{the defendant no.5has} submitted that the^{present O.A. filed by the applicant} bank is for recovery of^the amount^{from defendant nos.} 1 to 4 as^per the facts and circumstances^{as mentioned} and contended by the applicantⁱⁿ the^{present O.A. It} is submitted that defendant no.5^{has also filed O'A' No.} 30212022 title as "SBI Vs M/S^{CoromandelAgrico tut.} Ltd & Ors" before this Hontle^{Tribunal for Recoveryof} Rs.30,58,72,895/- against defendant^{nos. 1 & 4, which} is^pending for adjudication. It^is further^{submitted that} admittedly the defendant^{no.5 bank is the lead bank as} well as the monitoring bank and^{one of the consortium} lenders of defendant no. 1 company.^{Since it is well} admitted and contended by^{the applicantitself that the} defendant no.5 is also one of the^leaders of^defendant no. 1 company, therefore, it is^prayed to^{the Hon'ble} Tribunal that the interest of the defendant^{no.5 must} be protected by the Hon'ble Tribunal^{in decidingthe} cd

¶36

oA NO/169/2023

¶37

¶38

claim and relief sought by the applicant^{bank against} the defendant nos. 1 to 4. It^is further^{submittedthat} the defendant no. 5 is a^{proformadefendant. However,} it is reiterated that the defendant^{no. 5 is also a} member of the consortium bank^{and the defendant no.} 5 has a^{pari-passucharge} over^{all the moveable and} immovable^properties of^{the defendant nos.1to 2. It is} prayed that that this Honble Tribunal^{may decidethe} claim of the applicant^{withouthampering the legal} rights of the defendant^{no.5 and also allow defendant} no.5 to proceed with the^{enforcementmeasuresin} order to recover its^{dues against the defendantnos.1} to 4 as^per law.

¶39

The applicant^{bank has filedits evidence.}

¶40

Heard the Ld.^{Counsels of applicant bank, the Ld.} Counsel for defendant^{nos.2 to 4 and the Ld. Counsel} for defendant^{no.5 and perused the record'}

¶41

The defendant^{no. 5 has filed the WS stating that} the defendant no.5^{is also one of the lenders of the} defendant no.1^{companyand has a pari passu charge} over all the^{moveableand immovable properties of} defendant no.1 &^{2, therefore, the interest of the} defendant no.5^{must have been protected by the} Tribunal in deciding^{the claim and relief soughtby the} applicant bank^{against the defendant no.1 to 4. The} defendant no.5^{is free to file an applicationunder} Section 19 of the^{RDB Act for recovery of the dues' It} is submitted that defendant^{no.5 has also filed O.A'No'} 3OZ12O22 title^{as "SBI Vs M/S CoromandelAgrico Pvt'} Ltd & Ors" before this^{Hon'bleTribunal for recovery of} Rs.30,58,72,895/- againstdefendant^{nos.1 & 4, which} sI

¶42

oA NO/169/2023⁶

¶43

is^{pending for} adjudication'^{Therefore, no recovery} certificate^{can be passed in favour of defendant no'5 in} the^presentOA'

¶44

From^{perusal of the entireevidence, it is clear} that the defendants^{have failed to prove their caseas} claimed in the^{written statement' On the other hand'} the applicant^{bank has proved his case against the} defendants^{and therefore, the defendantsare liable to} pay the amount claimed^{by the applicant bank and the} O.A of the^{applicant bank is liable to be allowed'}

¶45

In the light^{of the above discussions,the present O'A'} deserves to^{be allowed against defendant no'2 to 4'} The defendant^{no.l is before Ld'NCLT, therefore'no} order can^{be passed against defendant no'1'}

¶46

ORDER

¶47

I hereby^{allow this O.A. of the applicant bank and} direct the^{defendant nos. 2 to 4 to pay jointly and} severally to^{the applicantwithin 30 days from today'a} sum of Rs.8,19,64,250/-^{alongwith cost, expenses and} interest @13.00o/o^{from the date of filing of this O'A till} the date of^realization'

¶48

In^{case of failure to depositthe above amount} within the^{stipulatedperiod, the same shall be} recovered^{from the sale of mortgagedproperty bearing} Flat no. 306,^{Sabzar Group HousingSociety, Sector-45'} Faridabad^{(Haryana).In case of shortfall, the same} S-\

¶49

oA NO/169/2023⁷

¶50

shall be recovered^from the^{personal movableand} immovable assets of the^{defendant nos.2to 4.}

¶51

Recovery Certificate^{be issuedforthwith andbe} sent to Recovery Officer,^{Debts Recovery Tribunal-Il,} Delhi.

¶52

The registry of this^{Tribunal is hereby directedto} issue free copy of the^{order and send the same to both} the^parties.

¶53

Parties are direct^{to appear before the Ld'} Recovery Officer,^{DRT-II, Delhion 26-10.2026.Pending} IAs, if any, stand^{disPosed of.}

¶54

File be consigned to^records.

¶55

Date: 25.08.2026

¶56

t)--

¶57

q; (susHrl KUMAR nAs-toct) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

¶58

This^judgement has^{been signed,}

¶59

dated and

¶60

pronounced in oPen court'

¶61

¶62

Date :25.08.2026

¶63

(susHrl KUMAR RAsroGI) PRESIDING OFFICER DRT-II, Delhi

Idbi Bank v. Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd. Through Irp Mr Sushil Kumar Singhal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Idbi Bank v. Coromandel Agrico Pvt. Ltd. Through Irp Mr Sushil Kumar Singhal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases